On 3/14/2014 12:55 AM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Thu, 13 Mar 2014 21:59:23 -0400, KC wrote:

Your web page, unless you've changed it drastically since you last
posted the URL, has a good number of grammar errors and style
inconsistencies. I did not look close enough to see if there were
spelling errors, too. That you don't see any of these is not surprising,
and since your client's native language isn't English, he isn't likely
to notice, either. If I were in your shoes and trying to pass myself off
as a professional-level web guy, I'd find someone who has
professional-level knowledge of "English as she is written," because you
don't have such knowledge.

===

Style inconsistencies are *extremely* important to a guy who has a
tree that needs to come down.


One thing I did for instance was move the video that used to come up on
what would probably be the first picture folks might click on.. After
hearing Dicks CC, I decided that having a vid load first might be
offputting so I put it deeper into the site. Hopefully now the first
thing folks see, "isn't" a "please wait for video" note

See Dick, I'm listening

===

He knows of what he speaks.


Not really. My comments on Scott's website were just based on my
initial reaction to it, putting myself in a prospective customer's frame
of mind.

I've created a few websites in the past but nothing as fancy as what
Scott is putting together. I did the original one for the company I had
but then had a professional service redo it once the business started to
grow. It was mainly due to the clientele who would be viewing it who
were mostly big, major corporations. I wrote the script but the
service added the pictures, artwork and determined the format in which
the information was presented. The early drafts were getting too busy
and complex but the final version was made more simple and easy to navigate.

The goofy website I created for the guitar shop was (and remains) about
as simple as they come. At one point (about 3 years ago) I created a
much "fancier" one that had flash presentations, music and a more
complex path to follow for information. The customer base the shop had
immediately started complaining. They liked the original, simple to
navigate format. So, after a month of testing the new one, I went back
to the original. I don't maintain it anymore, but neither I or Rick who
now maintains it ever worry too much about grammar errors and style
inconsistencies. We are not trying to sell guitars to English majors.
Both he and I try to spell things correctly but an occasional goof or
typo doesn't seem to bother anyone. I've never heard anyone complain
about a misspelled word. The only complaints were when I tried to make
it too fancy and it became more difficult to navigate.

It still averages over 10,000 "hits" per month which is incredible when
one considers the size of the shop.

I think website owners are often more impressed with the their websites
than the people who visit them are and tend to over-do it with glitz and
fanciness. Understandable, but if the intent is to sell items or a
service, the information presented should be easy to view and fast to
acquire.

The other thing is that physiologically a complex website that is too
"busy" and full of flash presentations and glitz suggests $$$$ IMO.
Simple suggests affordable. People don't want to be immediately
intimidated when first introduced to a company or service. They want to
feel comfortable and welcome.

Overall I think Scott has done a great job in responding to his client's
desires and requests. Time will tell if it is effective in terms of
selling the services they provide.

Just my opinion.